> Your argument that a Marxist has no right to criticise the leadership of
> other groups smacks of this same liberal condescension as well as the US
> SWP/USFI syndrome of "uncritical support" for whoever happens to be leading
> a given national struggle, no matter how rotten the leadership. This has led
> the USFI and SWP to simply tail the IRA, PLO, ANC etc. You're making the
> same unMarxist error.
So it's Marxist for us (you and I in North America) to denounce them and "lead" from
afar? How does this possibly do anything other than simply *substitute* analysis for
relevancy? The IRA and the PLO/PA lost my support not for crossing some imaginary
line where they became "wretched", or ceased to live up to my brilliant understanding
of their flesh and blood situation. What they did was something far worse and more
sinister: They started repressing other forces in the territories they live in who
have the same (stated) goals and differing tactics, which effectively makes them
pawns acting on behalf of the RUC and the IDF. Before Oslo or the GFA our job here
was to do what we could to express solidarity with them. Period. If you know the
situation well enough to be a real leader of their struggle, go to them and see if
they appoint you as their leader. If not, denouncing them as (fill in the blank)
means nothing, except division amongst revolutionaries in the face of a very united
enemy.
Macdonald